ECONOMIC ACTIVITY ASSOCIATED WITH HUNTING ALONG THE TEXAS GULF COAST Joni S. Charles, PhD Contracted through the River Systems Institute Texas State University – San Marcos For the National Wildlife Federation February 2005 Introduction This report focuses on estimating the economic activity1 associated with hunting in Sabine Lake/Sabine-Neches Estuary, Galveston Bay/Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary, Matagorda Bay/Lavaca-Colorado Estuary, San Antonio Bay/Guadalupe Estuary, Aransas Bay/Mission-Aransas Estuary, Corpus Christi Bay/Nueces Estuary, Baffin Bay/Upper Laguna Madre Estuary, and South Bay/Lower Laguna Madre Estuary. Each bay/estuary area will define a separate geographic region of study comprised of one or more counties. The results show trip- and equipment-related spending of residents and non-residents on hunting in each of these regions and the impact this spending had on the economy in terms of earnings, employment and sales output. Migratory2 and resident birds, including waterfowl are assumed to be the primary targets of hunting opportunities in the regions of interest to this study. Estimates of the direct impacts associated with visitor spending were produced using IMPLAN, an input-output of the Texas economy developed by the Minnesota IMPLAN Group. General state information from the 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation (U.S. Department of the Interior March 2003) and a study done by Southwick Associates (Southwick 2003)is available for hunting. However, no information exists on a regional basis for this type of activity, but stamp data exists on a county basis, and from this data, the number of licensed hunters can be obtained. Estimates of hunting economic activity are provided in terms of direct expenditure, sales output, income, and employment. These estimates are reported by category of expenditure. Indirect and Induced (Secondary) impacts are generated from the direct impacts calculated by IMPLAN. Indirect impacts represent expenditures made and allocated to the sectors in which purchases made from suppliers. Induced impacts represent spending by employees who earn income within these industries. Section A provides a brief overview of the study area and geography of the bay system. Section B briefly describes hunting in the study area. Section C summarizes the direct impact of hunting in each of the Bay areas. Section D will provide estimates of economic activity of each region of study - regional direct and indirect employment, as well as direct and indirect income generated by hunting. Appendix A contains definitions of words and terms used in this study. Appendix B provides details of data collection, methods used to calculate expenditures, adjustments made to the data, assumptions and 1 In this study, economic activity refers to the direct stimuli generated by resident and non-resident expenditures. It is not uncommon to make a distinction between economic impact and economic activity. Southwick refers to economic activity as ‘economic importance’ Southwick, R. (2002). The Economic Effects of Sportfishing Closures in Marine Protected Areas: The Channel Islands Example - A Report Prepared for the American Sportfishing Association United Anglers of Southern California. Fernandina Beach, Florida, Southwick Associates, Inc.: 1-18. 2 The USFWS and the U.S. Census 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation report lists Geese, Duck, Dove and other migratory birds in this category. discusses limitations of the model. Appendix C explains the model used to estimate economic activity. A. Study Area and Geography of the Bay System3 Figure 1: Counties of the Study Area 3 See http://www.glo.state.tx.us/coastal/cmpdoc/jpegs/guidance-czb- sm.jpg for maps of Texas coastal zones. Figure 2: Bay Areas Comprising the Study Area Table 1: Texas Bays, Estuaries and County Breakdown of Study Area Bay/Estuary Counties South Bay/Lower Laguna Madre Estuary + ½ Kenedy (Port Mansfield Area) Cameron (Hidalgo) Willacy Baffin Bay/Upper Laguna Madre Estuary (Jim Wells) Kenedy (- ½ Kenedy Baffin Area) Kleberg Corpus Christi Bay/Nueces Estuary Nueces San Patricio Aransas (½ Aransas) Aransas Bay/Mission-Aransas Estuary ( 2/3 Refugio) Aransas San Patricio San Antonio Bay/Guadalupe Estuary (Goliad) ( 1/3 Refugio) Calhoun (½ Aransas) (Victoria) Matagorda Bay/Lavaca-Colorado Estuary (Wharton) (Jackson) Matagorda Calhoun Victoria Galveston Bay and the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary (Fort Bend) Galveston Brazoria Harris (Liberty) Chambers Sabine Lake and the Sabine-Neches Estuary Orange Jefferson Figure 3: Figure 1 shows the study area by county where hunting takes place. Study area will be defined in this study as the area where both the activity and the economic activity takes place. Figure 2 shows the location of each bay. Table 1 shows the counties which are the primary beneficiaries of the sales, employment, and income from activities in the bays and estuaries fed by freshwater inflows. Bay regions may overlap more than one county boundary to define the economic region of interest to this study. 4 B. About Hunting in Texas Gulf coast estuaries and bays, fed by freshwater inflows, contain coastal wetlands which are breeding grounds, food source, and habitat for many animal species, including local and migratory birds. Waterfowl use the wetlands plants and animals as food sources as they migrate or look to ‘winter’ in a warmer climate. Healthy estuaries and bays, which depend on freshwater inflows, provide cover for nesting waterfowl and other birds. Coastal counties such as Jefferson, Fort Bend, Wharton, Calhoun and Chambers provide excellent habitat for these birds and plenty of opportunities for hunters5. Expenditures on hunting generally reflect those of participants 16 years and older. In 2001, 500,000 state residents and nonresidents, 16 years and older hunted migratory birds in Texas, spent over 4000 days hunting and spent money on trip, equipment and miscellaneous other things such as magazines, membership dues, licenses, permits and land leasing. Estimates of hunting participation on the local or regional level is made difficult by the lack of published data. Almost 33,000 stamps were issued to participants in waterfowl hunting by the end of Summer 2003. Counties surrounding Galveston Bay and Matagorda Bay were the sources of the largest number of waterfowl stamp licensees, with approximately6 63% and 16% of licenses issued. Sabine Lake had approximately 11% of licensed hunters and Corpus Christi had a smaller (less than 10%), but appreciable number of waterfowl stamp holders. It is important to note that estuaries along the Texas Gulf coast vary by size, population, and economic viability, as noted in a Jones and Tanyeri-Abur study (Jones and Tanyeri-Abur 2001). 4 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, Texas 5 http://southern.ducks.org/TXLettertoHunters.php 6 Note: Some counties are included in more than one estuary. C. Initial Spending Spending on hunting is measured by the spending by hunters, 16 years or older, for such things as food and lodging, transportation, rentals, guide and access fees, ice and bait, oil, equipment and other expenditures. These expenditures become revenues from sales to final demand. Trip Related Expenditures typically make up 28% of hunting related expenditures – USFWS and U.S. Census 2001 National Survey. This includes Food and Lodging 47%, Transportation 38%, Other 20 % (guide fees, private and public land use, equipment rental, boating costs, Heating and Cooking). Equipment Related Expenditures typically make up 44% of hunting related expenditures - 2001 National Survey. This includes include Hunting Equipment 73% (shotguns, guns, rifles, sights, ammunition, dogs), Auxiliary Equipment 9% (Camping Equipment, Binoculars, Specific Hunting Equipment, Clothing), and Special Equipment 17% (Campers, Trail Bikes). Other Expenditures typically make up 25% of hunting related expenditures. This includes Magazines 2%, Dues and Contributions 4%, Land Leasing and Ownership 80%, and Licenses, Stamps, Tags and Permits 14%. 1. Summary of Expenditures Total expenditures in each Bay area was estimated using category expenditure data from a study by Southwick Associates (Southwick 2003), with reference made to the 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. This data was used to estimate trip and equipment expenditures. Methodology used to adapt these figures to spending at the bay/estuary regional level is explained in Appendix B. The following is a summary of expenditures in the Bay region of Texas adjusted for inflation7. 7 2001 adjusted to 2003 dollars. Table 2: Summary of Resident and Non-Resident Category Expenditures8 – by Bay ($) Rental Bay: Food and Guide, Equip- Other Resident Lodging Transport Fees, ment Ice, Bait and Fuel S.Antonio 90.38 59.79 34.96 274.72 156.09 Matagorda 65.73 33.22 34.96 274.72 156.09 Galveston 94.49 59.79 36.71 274.72 156.09 C. Christi 82.16 59.79 34.96 274.72 156.09 Aransas 82.16 59.79 34.96 274.72 156.09 Baffin 82.16 53.14 34.96 274.72 156.09 South 82.16 53.14 34.96 274.72 156.09 Sabine 53.41 39.86 34.96 274.72 156.09 Hunting Summary Expenditure: Residents $300 Food and $250 Lodging $200 Transport $150 Rental, Guide, Fees, Ice, Bait and Fuel $100 Equipment $50 Other $0 Baffi n South Aransas Sabine S.Antonio Matagorda Galveston C. Christi 8 Expenditures for Rentals, Guides, Fees, Ice, Bait, Fuel, Equipment and Misc. Other are the same or similar in this summary table, and other Bay Expenditure tables because separate regional information on these types of expenditures were not available. Therefore, category proportions of the average were used. Details can be found in Appendix B. Expenditures for the other categories could be determined by individual regions. Rental Bay: Non- Food and Guide, Equip- Other Resident Lodging Transport Fees, ment Ice, Bait and Fuel S.Antonio 129.66 85.77 50.16 394.09 223.91 Matagorda 94.29 25.08 50.16 394.09 223.91 Galveston 109.59 85.77 52.66 394.09 223.91 C.